Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

LA area wildfires - movie theaters affected

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by John Thomas View Post

    This is correct. We had a couple of extremely windy days in the middle of a drought. Conditions were already perfect for small brush fires to get out of control. Then the wind not only made the fires spread rapidly, but also made water drops from the air impossible.

    The Bay Theater is still standing, no word yet on its condition otherwise.
    I can see that when they rebuild that they may not allow Palm trees. It's those dang things that caused the fire to spread so quickly. They give off incredible amounts of Embers.

    Comment


    • #17
      When we were in L.A. last fall, we were told by a taxi driver that palm trees aren't native to California. I'm not sure if that's true or not but if so, maybe their time is ending!

      Comment


      • #18
        Many years ago, shortly after I moved to California, I did the tour of the Spanish mission in San Luis Obispo. The guide told us that palm trees were originally introduced to California by missionaries in the eighteenth century, as a cheap and reliable way to provide shade during the hot summers, and because palm fronds can be used as building material. The idea caught on, and two and a half centuries later they've become a symbol of Southern and Central California. If he's right, they aren't strictly native to California, but they've been here a while.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Leo Enticknap View Post
          Many years ago, shortly after I moved to California, I did the tour of the Spanish mission in San Luis Obispo. The guide told us that palm trees were originally introduced to California by missionaries in the eighteenth century, as a cheap and reliable way to provide shade during the hot summers, and because palm fronds can be used as building material. The idea caught on, and two and a half centuries later they've become a symbol of Southern and Central California. If he's right, they aren't strictly native to California, but they've been here a while.
          ​
          I didn't think about the earthquake resistance being at odds with fire resistance. Thanks for the local perspective!

          Originally posted by Mike Blakesley View Post
          When we were in L.A. last fall, we were told by a taxi driver that palm trees aren't native to California. I'm not sure if that's true or not but if so, maybe their time is ending!
          I don't believe they are native to Florida either. In both States (as well as Nevada/Arizona, etc.) I think they were brought in to mimic the "tropical paradise" look of the Caribbean.

          Comment


          • #20
            The concept of "native" versus "invasive" or "introduced" species in an environmental context is time-dependent. You need a baseline time period to start from in order to make your comparison.

            Locations where different species of plant and animals live and grow can change over time, even without human intervention. Wind and rain can transport plant seeds and pollen from one place to another. Animals can migrate. Changing environmental conditions like temperature, moisture or ground cover can make it inhospitable for some species to grow or make it more beneficial for others. The flora and fauna of a given area will, naturally, change over time.

            Then, you have to consider human-caused introduction of species. Cane Toads were transported from Central and South America to Australia in an attempt to control pests (cane beetle) but it turned out to be an environmental disaster. Zebra Muscles were transported from Asia to the American Great Lakes via bilge water in oceangoing ships and that has caused major changes to the ecosystem of the Great Lakes and other areas around the world.

            When deciding what species are invasive or not, you have to consider the time period of your observations. Zebra Muscles were introduced to the Great Lakes in the late 1980s. Today, they are part of the Great Lakes ecosystem whether we like it or not. If your time context is prior to 1988, Zebra Muscles are invasive. In 2025, we consider them "naturalized."

            When I worked at the Tom Ridge Environmental Center, there was a lot of discussion about what species should be considered invasive, introduced or native. Presque Isle State Park is a unique ecosystem that many people want to protect. There are many people who study the plants and animals that live and grow on Presque Isle. There has been a lot of haggling and political talk about what species are "good" or "bad" on the park. The Environmental Educators that I talked to often say that the species that were found on Presque Isle in the time when the first explorers described the species should be considered "native" and anything found on the park after that time should be considered "introduced" or "invasive." That would put the time context in the late 1700s through the mid-1800s. However, there are some people who say that the time context should be the time when Presque Isle was developed for public access and roads and buildings/infrastructure were built. That would put the time context into the 1920s. Others say that the time context should be at the end of the last Ice Age when glaciers melted and formed the Great Lakes. Those time periods are hundreds and thousands of years apart!

            If you look at the palm trees that grow in California, they can be considered a naturalized species in today's context. They would be considered an introduced species if your context is the 18th Century. If you look into the next hundred years, palm trees might be considered an endangered or even extinct species.

            Bottom line: You have to define your terms.

            Comment


            • #21
              Speaking of invasive species - purple Skittles!

              For decades there was a federal ban on the growing of blackcurrants in the States due to their hosting of a fungus which attacked pine trees. Although the ban was lifted, blackcurrants remain pretty much unknown in the US.

              In contrast, during WWII in the UK, blackcurrant production was actively encouraged as it grew well there and was a vital source of Vitamin C. The pine fungus wasn't an issue as it didn't attack British trees.

              To this day blackcurrants are still popular in the UK, to the extent that Ribena, a blackcurrant flavoured squash, is the third best selling squash. Grape flavor? Not really a thing in the UK. Which is why purple British Skittles taste completely different to American ones, being blackcurrant flavored!
              Last edited by Allan Young; 01-14-2025, 12:29 PM. Reason: Duh! Got my currants and berries mixed up.

              Comment


              • #22
                Within the last 2-3 years, blackberries have started to appear in my local Trader Joe's, but they are very pricey: around $2-3 more than the equivalent box of raspberries or blueberries. I guess, therefore, they are imported. Leeks are another one: when I lived in England you could get a bag of 5-6 large ones for around a quid (admittedly that was 13 years ago now). Here, it's $4-5 for two tiny ones, if you can find them at all.

                But local regulatory quirks are always interesting. The latest one I was hearing about here is a group of campaigners who want to overturn the state law banning the keeping of skunks as pets, which apparently was imposed in the 1970s because they can be a vector for rabies, and one or two skunk owners got infected and died. The campaigners' argument is that now an effective vaccine for rabies in animals exists, the ban is no longer justified. Personally I have about as much desire to have a skunk in my house as I have to contract rabies (and our cats would have something to say about that, too), but each to their own, I guess!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Leo Enticknap View Post
                  Within the last 2-3 years, blackberries have started to appear in my local Trader Joe's, but they are very pricey: around $2-3 more than the equivalent box of raspberries or blueberries. I guess, therefore, they are imported. Leeks are another one: when I lived in England you could get a bag of 5-6 large ones for around a quid (admittedly that was 13 years ago now). Here, it's $4-5 for two tiny ones, if you can find them at all.
                  Both my visits to Seattle were during berry season. I felt like my diet was mostly berries with a little roughage thrown in. Two blackberry species (one invasive and one native) can just be picked to your hearts content, even in urban areas, nevermind the full trays we would buy at the local markets for cheap. Probably a good thing, they need the extra Vitamin C up there.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Sorry Leo and Ryan, I got my berries and currants mixed up. The ban was on blackcurrants, not berries.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X